Originally posted by fieldsofwind
All of those signs for the end occured to them, and they have been occuring ever since.
I'd be most interested in your explaination of how the "Abomination of Desolation" (one of the "signs" Jesus gave) ocourred in the apostles generation and has been "ocourring ever since".
By the way... 14 is another key verse. That verse says that His gospel will be preached to the whole world, and then the end will come. (And it doesn't have to mean 'right then'... but then... sometime after that.)
Well, Paul infallibly claims that as of the 60's AD, the Gospel had already been preached to "all the world", indeed to "Every creature under Heaven". So that particular "Sign", according to Paul, was completely fulfilled in his lifetime, in no need of any future or ongoing fulfillment. Much the same as the prophesy of the Virgin Birth & crusifixion were, as I'm sure you agree, completely fulfilled in the 1st century and in no need of "continual, ongoing fulfillment".
(Come to think of it, maybe I'm wrong about that. Maybe you do believe that Jesus is to be born and crucified again and again and again, that would be consistant with your hermeneutic anyway)
Your comment about what "then" means is interesting. Do you apply that to the "rapture" as well?
1 Thess 4:17
"The dead in Christ will rise first,
then we who are alive and remain shall be caught up....."
Does the "then" in this pasage have the same elasticity as you apply to the "then" in Matt 24?
Do you agree that the Living were to be caught up at an undetermined later time, perhaps even thousands of years after the dead had been raised?
Posted by parousia: "The "YOU" in Matt 24 are the 1st century apostles Jesus was directly addressing, not you and me"
So you don't think that Matthew 5-6... or countless other examples were meant for us?
Heheh... already dealt with. Do you believe Php 2:19 is for you and me? your stated hermeneutic is inconsistant, mine is consistant. What was meant for them alone is meant for them alone, what was meant for all is meant for all. There are sciptures only applicable to the original receivers, there are scriptures applicable to "ALL" from the original receivers to us today and beyond, but there is no scripture given
without direct application to those who first recieved the message. (unless specifically stated)
Salvation passages are for all and apply to all, in contrast, There is only one "Last Days" generation.
Daniel was given explicit information about what would happen in the "Last Days", but was told He wouldn't see it come to pass, that it was not for his time. In Contrast, Jesus told His apostles they would see these Last days events (all of them) unfold before their very eyes, and scripture confirms theirs, unlike Daniels, was in fact the "Last Days" Generation.
It's roughly 500 years form Daniel to Christ.
God calls that "a long time", not for Him to see. 2000 years from Christ to the present and you claim God calls that "Shortly" and something the Apostles would live to see?
Posted by parousia: "You say the disciples saw signs that indicated the 2nd coming was "near" yet you go on to insist it in fact was not "near" to them. what you are saying is that Jesus gave them false hope."
Nope... it was near... and it is still near. Do you think that God's timing of near is the same as our's?
FOW, allow me to alleviate your ignorance in this area.
Contrary to your assertion, God can tell time correctly.
In fact, whenever God attaches a "time limit" to a prophesy's fulfillment, it is
always given to be understood by how time relates to man, and
NOT how time relates to God.
Every time, without fail, ALWAYS.
In fact, according to scripture, failure to fulfill a prophesy "on time" constitutes failure to fulfill a prophesy.
Jesus Himself assigns "human understanding" to the word "Near" in his prophesy.
FOW, according to your rendering was "It" "near" from the moment Jesus said it was? or I'll even give you John the Baptist as the point where "nearness" began? If it's been 2000 years "near" so far, can you explain how 500 years before John the baptist, it wasn't near?
What makes 2000 years "Near" and 2500 years "Far"?
When God says something is "far off", He can be trusted. Likewise when He says somethign is "Near", He can be trusted.
Your contention is, by default, that neither of those terms (Near or Far) have any literal meaning in scripture, while scripture itself testifies, time after time after time after time, the
exact opposite. You say that if God tells me an event is far off, and I won't live to see it, that I shouldn't believe Him, likewise if God tells me an event is "near" and that I will live to see it , that I should really not expect to see it as I was told I would, all because God, when communicating to me, is unable to "reckon" time the same way I do.
Ridiculous
Of course what He said would happen to them happened to them. However, He never said to them that He would come again as He left in their generation. Matthew 24:34 speaks of this... and yet... all of "these things" that happened to them, and happen still today... were precursors to the actual event. If they were not... He would not have told them immediately before hand that everything they saw would be signs signifying that it was near.
Posted by parousia: "Luke 21:20-23 is speaking about Jerusalems Destruction in AD66-70.
You will not find a single reputable scholarly commentary that disagrees with me on that point. It can be speaking of no other event. And since It is , as you agree, PARALELL to Matt 24, then Matt 24 is also speaking about the same event. Paralell accounts can not have different meanings."
I have no problems with that... even though it could also be referring to a future desolation of Israel in the "end". Luke 21:6-- pertains to that, and it is another sign that the final events are "near". (Look at Luke 21:20) After that look at Luke 21:24-- and how Jerusalem will be trampled on by the Gentiles until the times o the entiles are fulfilled. Perhaps meaning that what was seen in AD 70 was the beginning of the 'trampling' that would occur until the time of the Gentiles being fulfilled... (the end). And... that trampling has been occuring for a while, no? Relating to Matthew... one can say that verse 21 pertains to that time of the Gentiles being fulfilled as is portrayed in Luke 21:24. It may have started then... but it is not over yet. Verse 21 in Matthew 24 is still speaking of the end. Remember... their "parallel". So... once again... I do not see how you support your beliefs through scripture.
take care
FOW
Again, you throw out Jesus words that "all things written" would be fulfilled when the Disciples saw "Jerusaelm surrounded by armies", opting instead for "well perhaps it means they will begin to be fulfilled then and come to completion sometime in our future".
The fact is, AD70 was hardly the beginning of the gentile domination of Israel. Israel had been under Gentle domination since the Babylonian Captivity, however, in Ad 66, the city was given ovr to them to be trampled underfoot until the times of the gentiles were fulfilled.
Revelation 11:2 Gives us an exact duration of that very "trampling". 42 Months. Exactly how long the Roman Seige lasted.
Line your views with Jesus words, don't stretch His words to fit your view.
That's "all things written" FOW, not some, not most, but ALL. that includes, but is not limited to" The resurrection, New Heavens and earth arriving, Glorious appearing of the Lord with His angels to reward every man, ect, etc, etc... were to be all fulfilled by the time the 42 months had ended (Rev 11:2) When the Power of the Holy people had been finally Broken (Dan 12:7) What was that power? It was the greatest power ever given a specific group of Human beings. Sole relationship with the Lord God, which was manifest in the temple complex & Mosaic Law. Neither of which have existed since AD70.
It's over.
The Bible says it, I believe it, that settles it.